US “Unsuccessful” Wars Are Actually Smart and Performing As Planned

Warning added after getting angry comments on the following essay: the essay below tends to enrage self-proclaimed “liberals”, “progressives”, and mutually declared “democrats”. I know why: basically the essay observes that those poor souls have been so incredibly manipulated that they believe what the establishment wanted them to believe, all the way down to their beating hearts. What credulity was that? The establishment persuaded their naive followers that sometimes the US “got bogged down in war”… when that was actually the plan!

And let me insist: it’s not because I am describing a maneuver of sumptuous Machiavellianism… that I approve of it.

***

One silly notion is that of the US conducting “unsuccessful wars”. Like which one was “unsuccessful”? The one against the Indians, eradicating them all? Oops, so sorry we killed you all, but thanks for the continent? Was that unsuccessful? Vietnam? The US is now, de facto, allied to Vietnam (against you know whom). The war against Iraq from 1990 to 2003? Why would the war have been unsuccessful in Iraq, from the US point of view? Because the Iraqis don’t sell enough oil and gas to make US frackers grossly unprofitable? Quite the opposite, obviously! Afghanistan? Keep your enemies closer and in a state of complete degeneracy, test ever more sophisticated weaponry in real war conditions… How unsuccessful is that?

Contrarily to legend, the USA, as a nation is exactly where it wants to be, militarily. Economically, Trump is forcing US plutocrats out of China. Slowly, but surely. That’s also strategic. We don’t want this below to happen again… This time without back-up! (The US was the backup of France, everybody knew it in France in 1940… Although German and French fascists may have hoped, due to US careful designed “isolationism”, that time, the world war of 1939, was going to be different… )

This French B1 tank was destroyed by its crew (so it would be useless to the Nazis). May 1940

In 1936, France did a huge mistake: instead of going to war in Spain, as the Republic there, attacked by the Nazis (and Spanish and italian fascists), had requested, France listened to the perfidic Anglo-Saxon plutocracy from London and Washington… who had ordered France to stand down. Thus, after all, France, led by the Jewish Socialist PM Blum, didn’t intervene.

Consequence: in the week following May 10, 1940, it turned out that the vastly superior Franco-British forces didn’t function correctly, in part because of a number of relatively small, easy to correct, problems the French and British military were unaware of (no radio in tanks, no communications with air forces, no combat-trained pilots… and the surprise of having an enemy on speed, methamphetamines, who never slept).

By the time the French and British military adjusted to the reality of combat in 1940, a week later, 70 crack French divisions were encircled, cut out of supplies, France and Britain had lost the battle of France.

Morality: When confronted by enemies, it’s better to fight them, than ignore them. If nothing else, it keeps the training up, prevents surprises like May 1940. If France had intervened in Spain in 1936, maybe an unending low key war with Nazism would have started. It would have been better than the alternative…. A Holocaust (100 million killed, about 5% of world population), followed by the so-called “American Century”… we are more in the “American Century” than ever. Whereas France and Britain were allied and competitors of the USA in 1940, now they are just the US little helpers.

So what is next in strategy? Strategy is what decides the world, after all. Most of the French hated the Nazis, until the end of June 1940. After that, though, confronted to two million Nazi soldiers residing in France, they had to show respect. While the Nazis (and their US plutocrat helpers) killed 50 million Europeans, the US Deep State chuckled.

After the Macedonians occupied Athens, having defeated her in war, they established a plutocracy, which, arguably, lasted thousands of years. Things would have been completely different, Direct Democracy would have survived, had Athens not lost these two naval battles.

The USA understands now that it better be allied to France: the stakes have got much higher. Great, or Little Britain is not dependable anymore: watch the ridiculous Brexit. Germany, Japan are still trying to figure out what it all means, and how dependable they themselves are… Not that France doesn’t have a few things to figure out, either. Like the USA, it may soon discover globalization was not a friend: whereas France is number one military power in Africa, it’s only seventh in trade… In other words, the French… and the Americans… are protecting increasingly Chinese interests in Africa… How strategic is that. By the way, I am pro-Chinese, my daughter is studying Chinese since pre-K.

But I also know that messes of contradictory entanglements bring war.

Take Iran: a fascist theocratic state, which provides Europe with energy. And a state where even the secular population believes it should have nukes. That will not happen: at the next attack against tankers, especially if Iran renounces the nuclear accord of 2015 with Obama (and four other nations, including UNSC permanent members), there will be a military strike.

But remember 1936: sometimes, a little military act goes a long way, a bit like a vaccine…

Conclusion:

The US did NOT get “bogged down” in ANY war since 1776 CE. Quite the opposite: all those wars boosted US power ever more. [1]

The only existential crisis was earlier, when Jamestown came close to extinction after 1610 CE. By 1625 CE, when tobacco started to bring revenue, thanks to newly introduced slavery and addiction (in Europe), it was clear sailing.

France got seriously bogged down in war with Germany, from around 1750 CE until not just 1945, but arguably, to this day (very low key now, as Germany has a regime similar to France, now)… Although some the roots of the Franco-German go back to the Fifth Century… or even Julius Caesar

France had to militarily confront the Nazis in 1936. Or then, much less favorably, go fight them alone with Czechoslovakia as only Ally, in 1938. In both cases, US plutocrats, who wanted Nazism to grow into a Franco-British destruction machine, successfully manipulated the French to dissuade them to declare war…

It is in the best interest of the US Wall Street-Petrodollar-Fracking establishment to shut down the Persian Gulf, and then to have it re-open thanks to the heroic efforts of the Americano-Franco-British military… Japan and others will have to be grateful…

Cynical plans don’t stop there. The self-sufficiency of the US in fossil fuel, and now even exportation, was not a Trump realization, but the work of Obama and his National Security Adviser, Susan Rice (who was personally invested). At this point, the CO2 crisis is carefully groomed as an other cause of delightful (in the sense of increased US power) wars to come. [2]

Patrice Ayme

***

***

[1] As “power” is revered in the USA, this observation of mine, that US wars were profitable to the USA, is enough to enrage the pseudo-liberals, pseudo-progressives. Indeed, if I am right, they are wrong (at least, wrong as seen from the perspective of in their own minds). What is going on here? Listen to Tulsi Gabbard, four term Congresswoman from Hawaii who served years in the US military, and tried to help Assad. She poses as “anti-war”. However, she is FOR… handguns. In other words, she is all for US citizens killing each other: power at its best. She sees nothing wrong, intrinsically, with great wealth, either: cult of power again. So, if you tell these people wars increased US power, they hate you, because they are supposed to hate war, but also to revere the US (hence its power).

***

[2] The US is in the best position to maximize the crisis of the biosphere… and maximize the profits it will bring. That’s the plan. Obviously, most US citizens know this, intuitively, with their 20 tons of Co2 per capita, per year, and know enough to know that they shouldn’t know more. So they focus on Trump’s hairdo, and Trump’s tweets.

Share this: Please do share, ideas are made to spread and enlighten!

Like this:

Related

This entry was posted on June 19, 2019 at 11:59 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

27 Responses to “US “Unsuccessful” Wars Are Actually Smart and Performing As Planned”

Wouldn’t it be more to the benefit of the Russians and the Chinese to have the US bogged down in the Middle East/
How are the Europeans going to like more swarms of traumatized, militarized Middle Eastern refugees and more dependence on Russia oil?

My whole point, and that’s transparent in Benign’s anger, is that so-called “liberals” and “progressives” and mutually declared “Democrats” in the USA have been outrageously manipulated into systems of thoughts conducive to them having lost touch with what reality is. The US did NOT get “bogged down” in ANY war since 1776 CE. The only existential crisis was earlier, when Jamestown came close to extinction after 1610. By 1625, when tobacco started to bring revenue, it was clear sailing.

France got seriously bogged down in war with Germany, from around 1750 CE until not just 1945, but arguably, to this day… Although some will go back to the Fifth Century.

France had to militarily confront the Nazis in 1936. Or then, less favorably, go it alone with Czechoslovakia in 1938. In both cases, US plutocrats, who wanted Nazism to grow into a Franco-British destruction machine, manipulated the French into dissuading them to declare war…

It is in the best interest of the US Wall Street-Petrodollar-Fracking establishment to shut down the Persian Gulf, and then to have it re-open thanks to the heroic efforts of the Americano-Franco-British military… Japan and others will have to be grateful….

This entry proves that even self-proclaimed smart people can be incredibly stupid. You write like a member of the Blob, the Deep State, the corrupt Democratic Establishment, a Left Coast limousine liberal who undoubtedly has never served in any military.

You should be ashamed of yourself. Listen to Tulsi, she knows whereof she speaks. You don’t.

It seems to me that insults, when it’s all what a discourse is made of, are not instructive. OK, so you think I am an idiot, and the fashion model from Hawai’i is a genius.

After reading what you wrote, I have no idea what you are objecting to. My underlying point was subtle, Machiavellian. It is also a subset of my wider point, made for decades, since Tulsi was in diapers, about WWI and WWII, or killing all the Native Americans, for that matter: these were all wars which were highly profitable to the USA as it exists nowadays. That doesn’t mean I approve of them.

Tulsi is cute, and I have listened to her. I doubt she understands much, but I will listen to her more. Clearly, she is too young: I prefer Warren.

I am in general favorable to most Democratic presentations nowadays… although some are pro-Pluto: Biden just organized a large event at a billionaire’s mansion…

In any case, I write an essay with around 50 main ideas, you get infuriated… But by which idea did you object to?
Another thing: also I didn’t serve in the military very long, right, I had family members who served very long, in combat, up to 6 years, and the closest male to me after my own dad, got killed in combat, wearing a military uniform.

Amusing rage: we are one shooting down away from war with Iran. I had warned some Iranian friends, in the last few weeks NOT to go to Iran this summer, except if they wanted to see war from inside. The borders could be closed. They nearly didn’t go, from my advice, but they are there now.

Cutie Tulsi supports “whether people want to own handguns, or not”. Do I need to listen further?
She supports “Medicare For All” (as far as I know, I invented the concept, tried to have Obama implement it, which he could have done by EO)
On climate she just serves salad:”… the United States alone can’t accomplish this”. So not my fault, she already says, the US couldn’t do it, bcs others. Sounds like Trump.
On wealth, she is sorta OK, but asked explicitly by NYT about billionaires, she demurs… Warren has an explicit 2% wealth tax above 50 millions…

Tulsi’s father is “from Samoa”, but actually US American born part of emigrated white New Zealander, supposedly part Samoan. Gerald Michael Gabbard (born January 15, 1948) is an American politician, Democratic member of the Hawaii Senate, representing District 20… her mother is European from Michigan…

So much for Benign being benign 🙂
Patrice didn’t say those wars were great, just the opposite She explained for years US Deep State has organized smart wars which expanded the US empire including WW1 and WW2. US learned to use others against themselves in Indian wars

Patrice, your knowledge of world history is superb. And I am not competent to discuss it point by point. All I/Jeannie can do is to ‘brush our own yard’ so to speak and hope that the natural world gives us all sufficient time to find a new way!

Patrice,
Your point of objection seem to be with the plutocracy, but are they not the crest of this wave of human desire, that has been flowing across its global petri dish for the last 100,000 years? ‘Go forth and multiply.’
Public debt is used to support private wealth and it’s spent on large militaries, so we blow up other countries to sustain the value of surplus money.
Eventually, after the absolutists have gone onto Valhalla, those left might begin to understand that nature functions cyclically and we can’t override the processes enabling us, or else.
It’s a learning curve and it will take several generations and much trauma, before the dust starts to settle.
The financial system is like the circulation system of society, so those using it for their own benefit really don’t have an agenda, other than riding their gravy train as far as possible. They are motivated by appetite, not logic.
The long term function of this impending disaster will be to wipe away many of the paradigms humanity currently operates under, such as confusing the absolute with the ideal, as monotheism does. Or treating money as a commodity, rather than a contract.
I could give a list of what I see as the various misconceptions currently guiding humanity, but it is evident, even here, that people cling to their beliefs as long as possible.

When push comes to shove, debt is for fools to hold. For those who worries about US debt.

There is humanity and humanity. I was front and center in a corruption + toxicity affair in the last 2 months. It was a hard, furious, lonely fight. Still is. All others were petrified, indignant behind closed doors, rabbits in the light. The toxic, corrupt side used whatever, the usual you know. Same as in Pakistan… But it happened in California…

Ha. When push comes to shove, those holding the biggest piles will be trading them for the remaining public assets, facilitated by those bureaucrats who will be their future employees. It’s called predatory lending/disaster capitalism and it has gone on since the dawn of time.
Then we have true oligarchy.

Very interesting, the link you put. It supports my conclusion 100%…
I am not so sure about his history, especially about the Jews, Babylon. Nor the relevance… Some Jews were deported, others stayed in Israel. Then the deported were allowed back…

My gist from history is this: violence dominates facts and truth. In particular, debt… Why the author is obsessed by the Middle East for debt, I dunno…. There are zillions of more recent examples, from Caesar to Charles V, Francois I, Rothschild, Jackson, 20C…. I mention many in passing. The financial Plutos have to be beaten back into submission… Warren looks, sounds, bet equipped for that… Or then you can go for cutie Tulsi, and buy a handgun on credit, as she seems to recommend… 😉

Hello Patrice, My concern is that if the US strikes Iran, then Iran will strike back somehow, and the Gulf will be a mess. I disagree that the US has not been bogged down. The US achieved very little of value in Viet Nam, Afghanistan or Iraq, and it is only the inherent wealth of the US that means it can keep up this sort of activity. However, while frackers might keep the US in oil, other countries tend to need the Gulf open. I am far from sure that the US really wants a land-based war with Iran, and without one all it can do is carry out some irritating bombing and kill a lot of innocent civilians. Is that a legitimate objective?

Dear Ian:For the Gulf to be a mess is excellent to the US Deep State. That will show the world that the US Deep State and its not so little helpers, France and Britain are necessary, to clean-up messes.

Vietnam showed that the USA left when it wanted, punishing even its ally (South Vietnam, for job poorly done). And then, indispensable nation for all to see, made an alliance with the ex-North Vietnam. Those with long memories, like yours truly, will remember the USA was allied with the Vietminh in 1945… Vietnam showed that the USA couldn’t be bugged by bogged down…

In Afghanistan and Iraq, the USA achieved denial of riches, minerals, oil, to Russia, France, the rest of the EU. My family saw it from the first row. It’s not enough to be the big dog. Denied substance, the other dogs have shrunk… I explained this in past essays…

Other countries need the Gulf open, that’s true… so to Trump, on their knees they shall come. Him or Warren….

There is no need for a land war with Iran. Although Iran has dense forest, the Hercynian forest I used to run in, only in the north. Once air supremacy has been established, it will be observed to be less amazingly mountainous than Afghanistan. The plan obviously is to interdict only the south… That’s feasible not so expensively… Killing lots of civilians? No, giant bombs could take out the deepest installations… There are no in the middle of Isfahan (I love Isfahan!) There are even tactical nukes, nota bene…

I would suspect it’s to make the point that it goes to the dawn of civilization and has been effectively filtered out of said history. The winners write the history books.
Of course, we have to make it to 11/20, because of said Middle East.
I suspect I’ll vote Saunders in the primary, like last time. Stein in the general, but time will tell, this time.

I will vote Warren. Her program is closest to what I advocate. I voted Sanders last time… while a whole bunch of my “Democratic” friends accused me to be a Trumpist, bcs I had turned anti HRC… That was a weird experience… Even Hitler, Stalin, FDR and Joan of Arc have (had) good ideas, by my own reckoning. Yet, that shouldn’t make observers call me one of their partisans… One has to learn to separate ideas from moods…

The UNSC works. For example, if there is war with Iran, there will be UN consensus behind it… In 2003, the Bush administration barely established enough UN support to squeak by disingenuously, in spite of fierce French opposition…

The UN is a political entity. As I keep pointing out, government functions as the central nervous system of society, while finance functions as its value circulation mechanism.
So when you have what amounts to a metastatic cancer affecting the heart and arteries of the system, as all social and environmental value is reduced to the bottom line of money, to be siphoned out of everything, by those running it, the ruminations of an increasingly sidelined and undermined global debate society are next to worthless.
Banking is having its Marie Antionette moment and the coming implosion will make all previous revolutions seem like tea parties, in comparison.

Somewhat related to what you say, the GERMAN economy has thrived, thanks to bankrupt, state supported local banks… This has been a massive CHEAT on the rest of the EUrozone… while some could say, erroneously, that the UK “cheated” by having its own independent central bank… Not so because the ECB could have opened the spigot of fresh blood, lots of Euros, but didn’t… because that was the other facet of the German banking cheat….
Now this may all come to a head… I was the only one to say this for years, but recently a French global banker from the top bank agreed with me in private conversation that it was indeed going on…

So Marie Antoinette moment may be around the corner… Funny thing about Marie Antoinette is that she had what were for the times, ultra left opinions… That good heart, keen intellect, may have make her more confident to engage in treachery… treason… High treason…

Are you saying that the US endless war campaign is admirable, perhaps necessary? You rail against plutocracy and have acknowledged that these US wars have been waged by plutocrats for profits and power. Would you not agree that the US war machine has been a boon to plutocrats to the detriment of society generally by diverting the wealth of the US to pursuit of world empire?
Tulsi – for some reason you seem focused on her personal appearance (“cutie”, “model”) in belittling her and her anti-war stance, a bit catty perhaps?-has not taken a pure anti-war stance. She is campaigning against the “regime change” wars that have been blatant aggression by US plutocracy driven by its pure profit motive in seizing foreign assets and resources. You criticize her for a handgun position, yet at its roots handguns is war/violence issue at a more basic person to person level than the war/violence you seem to provocatively espouse as a some inherently human characteristic necessary to put an end to various evils such as your oft cited Nazis.
All the same, I enjoy your blog, especially the historical references that you cite. The Jamestown reference is interesting as that ugly episode of US history is often just buried away as a footnote in most public school history courses. The ugly truth is better hidden away so let them learn about the Mayflower.
Warren has some good solid ideas but her record on really doing any damage to plutocrats is less than impressive. Not sure she has the skill to put the whiny school yard bully in his place either.

Didn’t say this, that US endless war campaign is admirable, perhaps necessary…
I actually railed against it in countless essays…
But times have changed. Right now is not a century ago…

Tulsi war stance doesn’t look genuine to me. One indication? She is pro-handguns. 2/3 of gun deadly events are inside families. Obama too is telegenic/photogenic, because he is tall, lean, in spite of big ears, big nose….

I’m not catty… I really think only Warren has a chance, and the background to be president. Agreed she kept a low profile as Senator. But the times were not propitious. Now she is doing tremendous good by rolling out bold prop after bold prop, which, in turn, push the debate towards progress… Agreed maybe hard to beat the Bully with a woman… (Between us, Trump is probably much deleterious to the established Pluto order… Even Brexiteers weren’t helped, and thoroughly embarrassed by his apparition in the UK…)

Sanders will be demolished by Trump, because of his past Marxist leanings. And Joe, well, he is a traitor. I like him in the 1980s, and was disappointed ever since… (like with Gore) Kamala Harris, I like her a lot, except she is a total hypocrite, and would sleep with anybody to advance herself, in full view of anybody… She is local for me, had plenty of time to observe her. She is another Obama (not a compliment)…

Anyway, I reserve the right to change my mind after the next debate, and even like Tulsi. I would be shocked only if I fell in love with Joe.

Thanks for liking my essays. I put really a lot of effort on the historical side, and, although I do extrapolate (all historians do), I try to stick to facts. Facts checking surprises me a lot, quite often… I learn by writing the essays…